Smoodock's Blog

I find it humorous in a way that the Apostles are said to have copied so many pagan religious beliefs, modeling Jesus after each of the heroes found therein. It seems logical, if the writers of the New Covenant text plagiarized a religious belief, they would have used only one, or at the most two, picking the best stories from each. This is not the case, however, when one reads about Jesus, the copycat savior. We are to believe he is the copy of Mithras, the copy of Krishna, the copy of Attis etc. It seems that purveyors of these similarities are just throwing everything out there, hoping that something will stick. This latest investigation of mine, into the supposed similarity of Jesus and Attis, is pretty pathetic.

Some of the similarities are as follows:

• Jesus and Attis were born of a virgin on December 25^th.
• Similar to Jesus, Attis was crucified on “Black Friday” and his blood ran down the tree to redeem the earth.
• In the spring both Jesus and Attis were resurrected three days after their deaths.
• Just like Jesus, Attis’ body was eaten by his worshippers in a communal meal.
• New believers must be baptized in the blood of Attis

Attis was a god of the province of Asia, and the cult spread to Rome during the time of the New Covenant era. As a religion, the Attis cult existed several hundred years before Christ to about the 4^th or 5^th century BC. However, most of the many supposed similarities between Attis and Jesus are late. That is, if any copying was done it was done by the Attis cult, long after the Christian scriptures were written, and after Jesus was preached as the Savior of the world. These supposed similarities didn’t exist prior to the life of Jesus.

As far as the December birth is concerned, as I mentioned in previous blogs on syncretism, this date was not important to Christianity until about the 4^th century AD. Jesus was born in the fall, according to the Gospel narratives. In the Attis cult, Attis was born of the nymph Nana (some versions say Cybele, who was not a virgin). It seems the nymph was sitting under an almond tree, and she became pregnant, when an almond fell into her lap. She abandoned the babe, but a goat provided milk, and Attis survived. Does anyone see any similarity between this account and that of the Gospel of Luke? The very idea is laughable.

There is absolutely no evidence in any manuscript that Attis was crucified or died on a tree. He became mad and castrated himself. His blood poured out onto the ground, where violets immediately sprang up. Where is there evidence of Apostolic plagiarism here? Where is the similarity of Attis’ self inflicted wound and Jesus’ crucifixion? Where is the idea of a redeeming Savior God in the Attis cult?

The Attis cult was a vegetation religion. His death was commemorated during winter solstice and his returning to life at the spring equinox. All deities connected with the vegetation cycle were celebrated at these times. Does this mean Attis had a resurrection? Hardly! Cybele, Attis jealous mother, who caused his madness and eventual death, is said to have regretted her deed and preserved Attis’ body. Some accounts have his hair continuing to grow and his little finger moved. This is as close to it gets to a resurrection. Other versions have him buried and an evergreen tree grows from the grave site. How anyone sees a similarity here with that of Jesus’ bodily resurrection is not easily understood by folks like me. There is absolutely no logic to this comparison.

Did the worshipers of Attis celebrate his death with a communal meal? It is difficult to find out exactly what the Attis cult called a communal meal and even more difficult to understand what this meal is supposed to represent. Some say it was corn and wine, but whatever may be the case the excesses in which they took part could not be seen to resemble that of the sacrament of which Christians partake. Our Eucharist points to the saving death of Jesus and his life within us. What could the drunken display of winter solstice represent, especially, since we have already seen that Attis is not a savior god? What possible similarity could their meal have with our Holy Communion?

The initiates of Attis were “washed in the blood” – whose blood? It certainly could not refer to the blood of Attis, and the phrase “washed in the blood” is Christian, used by the purveyors of this myth to show similarity between Jesus and Attis. What actually occurred was: the initiates would lay in a pit, over which a platform of boards was laid. A bull was slaughtered upon the platform and its blood poured out onto the boards and dripped through the cracks unto the initiates. It would wet their faces and bodies, some even opened their mouths to drink in the warm blood of the bull. Other than using a Christian phrase to describe this religious rite, what would cause anyone to think of Jesus and Christian baptism after reading of such things as these? If Christian terminology is not used to “help” the reader understand, what the scholar (so-called) sees, would the reader see any similarity between Jesus and Attis? I think the answer is obvious.